Paluca v. Secretary of Labor’s Empirical Analysis
813 F.2d 524 · 1987
Citation profile
28 federal appellate · 9 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably Benton v. United States (1992), Ezekiel v. Michel (1995)
28 federal appellate · 9 district ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 32 U.S.C. § 709 (National Guard Technicians Act of 1968) · 5 U.S.C. § 8101 (Attendant Allowance Adjustment Act) · 5 U.S.C. § 8128 · 5 U.S.C. § 8132
Relies on Hagans v. Lavine · Association of Data Processing Service Organizations Inc v. B Camp Barlow · Johnson v. Robison · United States Railroad Retirement Board v. Fritz · Samuel Bailey v. Joe T. Patterson
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) final and conclusive for all purposes and with respect to all questions of law and fact; and (2) not subject to review by another official of the United States or by a court by mandamus or otherwise.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“... the question had changed from one dealing with the unreviewable discretion of the Secretary — ‘allowing or denying a payment’ — to one involving the question of reimbursement out of a tort judgment rendered under a state no-fault insurance statute. Section 8128(b) does not preclude review of that question.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“We conclude that § 8128(b) does preclude judicial review of the merits of policy or rulemaking decisions on statutory grounds, but does not impede the adjudication by the courts of constitutional issues such as those raised by plaintiffs in this case”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.